More stories

  • in

    Trump Is Said to Push for Early Reopening of North American Trade Deal

    The president wants to begin renegotiating a U.S. trade deal with Canada and Mexico earlier than a scheduled 2026 review, people familiar with his thinking said.The Trump administration intends to push to renegotiate the U.S. trade deal with Canada and Mexico ahead of a required 2026 review of it, seeking to shore up U.S. auto jobs and counter Chinese firms that are making inroads into the Mexican auto sector, people familiar with the deliberations said.The U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which Mr. Trump signed in 2020, required the three countries to hold a “joint review” of the deal after six years, on July 1, 2026. But Mr. Trump intends to begin those negotiations sooner, according to the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss plans that had not been made public.Trump officials particularly want to tighten the pact’s rules governing the auto sector, to try to discourage auto factories from leaving the United States, they said. They are also seeking to block Chinese companies making cars and auto parts from being able to export to the United States through factories in Mexico.Mr. Trump has also threatened to impose a 25 percent tariff on products from Canada and Mexico, saying those countries are allowing drugs and migrants to flow across American borders. Speaking from the Oval Office on Monday night after his inauguration, he said he planned to move forward with the tariffs on Feb. 1.Members of the Trump team believe that Mexico has been violating the terms of a separate agreement to limit metal exports to the United States, and they are eager to show the Mexican government that they mean to take action against such trade violations, one person familiar with the conversations said.The Wall Street Journal earlier reported that Mr. Trump was pushing for an early renegotiation of his North American trade deal. The three countries are required to meet to discuss the terms of the trade deal six years after the agreement went into force, but trade experts have expected the Trump team to speed up work on the issue.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump Pitches External Revenue Service to Collect Tariffs: What to Know

    President Trump has promised to generate a “massive” amount of revenue with tariffs on foreign products, an amount so big that the president said he would create a new agency — the External Revenue Service — to handle collecting the money.“Instead of taxing our citizens to enrich other countries, we will tariff and tax foreign countries to enrich our citizens,” Mr. Trump said on Monday in his inaugural address, where he reiterated a promise to create the agency. “It will be massive amounts of money pouring into our Treasury coming from foreign sources.”Much about the new agency remains unclear, including how it would differ from the government’s current operations. Trade experts said that, despite the name “external,” the bulk of tariff revenue would continue to be collected from U.S. businesses that import products.Here’s what you need to know about what Mr. Trump has proposed.The U.S. has an established system for collecting tariffs.Tariff revenue is currently collected by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which monitors the goods and the people that come into the United States through hundreds of airports and land crossings.This has been the case nearly since the country’s inception. Congress established the Customs Service in 1789 as part of the Treasury Department, and for roughly a century tariffs were the primary source of government revenue, counted in stately customs houses that still stand in most major cities throughout the United States, said John Foote, a customs lawyer at Kelley, Drye and Warren.With the creation of the income tax in 1913, tariffs became a minor source of government revenue, and after the Sept. 11 attacks, the customs bureau was moved from the Treasury Department to the Department of Homeland Security.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    ‘So Much Uncertainty’: Businesses Worry About Trump’s Many Tariff Plans

    The incoming president has floated numerous tariff plans. Retailers say their livelihood could depend on which ultimately come to fruition.For Klem’s, a general store in rural Massachusetts, each year has seemed more challenging than the last.First, there was the pandemic, then a global supply chain breakdown that left the store short of lawn mowers and shoes. Next, a spate of inflation raided American pocketbooks. All along, Amazon continued to pull customers away from brick and mortar stores like Klem’s.Now Jessica Bettencourt, Klem’s owner, says she is facing a new challenge that has left her wondering if the store — which was started by her grandparents in 1949 — will survive. The sweeping tariffs that President-elect Donald J. Trump has promised to impose could raise the price of foreign-made products and cut into her business’s already slim profits, she says.“A huge tariff increase would potentially decimate us,” she said. “A retail store like mine has slim margins to begin with.” It wouldn’t take a whole lot before “all of a sudden, those slim little pennies that you might make are gone,” she said.Mr. Trump comes into office having floated a wide variety of tariff plans. He has proposed a universal tariff on nearly all imports, plus levies ranging from 10 to 200 percent on products from China, Canada, Mexico, the European Union and elsewhere.Mr. Trump has promised to use tariffs for multiple goals: cajoling companies to make their products in the United States, funding tax cuts, persuading other countries to stem the flows of drugs and migrants and even forcing Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Debate Over U.S. Sanctions on Russia For Ukraine War Intensifies

    The president-elect has said he will use sanctions sparingly while vowing to end the war in Ukraine, renewing questions over their efficacy.Thousands of far-reaching sanctions have been imposed by dozens of countries on Russian banks, businesses and people since Moscow ordered tanks to roll across the border into Ukraine in the winter of 2022.Now, more than 1,000 days later, as President-elect Donald J. Trump prepares to take office, questions about the sanctions’ effectiveness — and future — are expected to come under renewed scrutiny.Mr. Trump has stated, “I want to use sanctions as little as possible.” And he has made clear that there will be a shift in American policy toward Ukraine, having promised to end the war in a single day.Experts believe that sanctions and continued military aid are almost certain to be bargaining chips in any negotiations.So how valuable are the sanction chips that Mr. Trump will hold?The answer is hotly debated.Predictions in the early months of the war that economic restrictions would soon undermine President Vladimir V. Putin’s regime or reduce the ruble to “rubble” did not pan out. Mr. Putin remains entrenched in the Kremlin, and his forces are inflicting punishing damage on Ukraine and gaining on the battlefield.Yet the idea that economic sanctions could bring a quick end to the war was always more a product of hope than a realistic assessment, said Sergei Guriev, a Russian economist who fled the country in 2013 and is now the dean of the London Business School.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump’s Plans to Scrap Climate Policies Has Unnerved Green Energy Investors

    President-elect Donald J. Trump is expected to roll back many of the rules and subsidies that have attracted billions of dollars from the private sector to renewable energy and electric vehicles.Money is the mother’s milk of politics, but the outcome of elections also determines where it flows — and last month’s was especially crucial for the energy industry.Clean investment — including renewable energy as well as the manufacturing of electric vehicles, batteries and solar panels — has boomed since the passage of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, championed by President Biden. In the third quarter of 2024, it reached a record $71 billion, according to a tracker maintained by the Rhodium Group, an energy-focused research firm, and M.I.T.The big question looming now on Wall Street: Will President-elect Donald J. Trump, who called Mr. Biden’s policies the “green new scam” during the campaign, pull back enough of those subsidies and regulations to meaningfully change the economics of investing in decarbonization?Market reactions right after the election seemed clear. Clean energy stocks dropped sharply, while shares of oil companies bounced, indicating a divergent view of how the two sectors will fare in the coming years.Near the top of Mr. Trump’s agenda next year is extending his 2017 tax cuts. He will most likely need to reduce spending elsewhere to do that. Clean energy tax credits — worth about $350 billion over just the next three years, according to the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation — would be a tempting target. The more those subsidies are pared, the more projects would no longer make financial sense.President Biden has championed the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act and other policies designed to address climate change and spur investment in cleaner forms of energy.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Why Mergers of Carmakers Like Honda and Nissan Often Falter

    The Japanese companies are considering joining forces to survive in a rapidly changing auto industry, but auto history is filled with troubled and failed marriages.The Japanese automakers Honda and Nissan are discussing a possible merger, in a bid to share costs and help themselves compete in a fast-changing and increasingly competitive industry.But a merger, even of two companies from the same country, is no guarantee of success, and the history of automotive deals is littered with failures and disappointments.Combining two large, global manufacturing operations is an incredibly difficult feat that involves reconciling different technologies, models and approaches to doing business. A merger’s success rests on getting ambitious managers and engineers who have spent decades competing with one another to cooperate. Teams and projects have to be scrapped or changed, and executives must cede power to others. In some cases, the merging companies are hamstrung by elected leaders who force them to keep operating money-losing factories.Thomas Stallkamp, an automotive consultant based in Michigan, was involved in the struggles of one of the biggest auto mergers, the 1998 merger of Chrysler and the German company Daimler. Mr. Stallkamp spent years in senior roles at Chrysler and DaimlerChrysler.“Car companies are big, complicated organizations, with large engineering staffs, manufacturing plants all over the world, hundreds of thousands of employees, in a capital-intensive business,” Mr. Stallkamp said. “You try to put two of them together and you run into a lot of egos and infighting, so it’s very, very difficult to make it work.”Honda and Nissan announced plans this year to work together on electric vehicles, and on Monday they formally began talks about extending that cooperation to a merger that could also include Mitsubishi Motors, a smaller manufacturer that works closely with Nissan. A pairing would unite Japan’s second- and third-biggest automakers, after Toyota, and create a company that would be the third largest in the world by number of cars produced, after Toyota and Volkswagen.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    U.S. Takes Aim at China’s Production of Essential Chips

    The older-style chips are crucial for a wide array of appliances and other machinery, including weaponry.The Biden administration on Monday initiated a trade investigation into China’s production of older types of computer chips that are integral for cars, dishwashers, telecom networks and military weaponry.The probe could ultimately result in tariffs or other measures to block Chinese chips from entering U.S. markets, though the decision of which, if any approach to take would fall to the incoming Trump administration.In industry after industry — from steel and ships to solar panels and electric vehicles — China has pumped money into building world-class manufacturing facilities, creating a surge of low-cost products that ultimately flood global markets. American companies, along with firms in many other countries, finding themselves unable to compete, have shut down, leaving Chinese firms largely in control of the global market.United States officials have been worrying that the semiconductor industry could be next. Chinese companies have been massively ramping up their production of chips, particularly the older types of semiconductors that continue to power a wide array of machinery and appliances. China is building more new semiconductor factories than any other country, a development that American officials argue threatens the viability of chip plants in Europe and the United States.Katherine Tai, the United States Trade Representative, said in a call on Sunday that China’s policies were enabling its companies to rapidly expand and to “offer artificially lower-priced chips that threaten to significantly harm, and potentially eliminate, their market-oriented competition.”That resulted in supply chains that “are more vulnerable and subject to supply chain choke points that can be used to economically coerce other countries,” she said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Starbucks Workers Say They Will Begin a Strike in 3 Cities on Friday

    The planned walkout in Los Angeles, Chicago and Seattle comes after talks between the company and the workers’ union failed to produce an agreement on raises.A union representing Starbucks workers said Thursday that baristas in Los Angeles, Chicago and Seattle would walk off the job Friday morning and that the strikes would spread to hundreds of stores by Christmas Eve unless the company improved its wage offer in contract negotiations.The union, which represents baristas at more than 500 company-owned stores in the United States — about 5 percent of the U.S. total — said it called the strike after a bargaining session with the company this week failed to produce better wage gains.The strike is expected to begin in about 15 stores across the three metropolitan areas, according to a union member familiar with the situation who was not authorized to speak publicly.“Starbucks proposed an economic package with no new wage increases for union baristas now and a guarantee of only 1.5 percent in future years,” the union, Workers United, said in a statement.The guarantee would entitle unionized Starbucks workers to receive a wage increase of 1.5 percent even if the company raises wages nationwide by less than that amount in future years. If the company raised wages by more than that — as it did this year, with a recently announced increase of 2 percent — unionized workers would get the higher amount.Andrew Trull, a Starbucks spokesman, said union delegates “prematurely ended” this week’s negotiations. “It is disappointing they didn’t return to the table given the progress we’ve made to date,” he added.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More